Offensive hurtful or hate speech should be protected by the first amendment

The debate "Offensive hurtful or hate speech should be protected by the first amendment" was started by
BBQonions on
September 10, 2016, 5:45 pm.
23 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 14 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.

we've been through this before. he did imply most, if not all Mexican immigrants were drug dealing rapists. you do the same thing all trump supporters do. you play the "this is what trump really meant" game to try to excuse his flagrantly racist, sexist, violent, illegal or just generally terrible statements.

the fact that Republicans are willing to hear racism so often and just ignore it is deeply disturbing. you are either so invested in your political party that you will ignore anything he does. or you are actually just a racist and don't see anything wrong with the atrocious things he says.

Hypersensitivity is racist all on its own. Don't toe the extremes: they lead to thr same conclusion. Striving to condemn something as being racist--taking extreme sensitivity to it--is in itself racist. If somebody says something stereotypical, it is not racist, but one who claims it is believes the stereotype. Am I making sense? If not ill try to clarify what I mran.

to violate the rights of a racial, ethnic, or religious group for no reason other than their membership in said group, then you are violating the constitution, and thus should be banned.

it's much the same way you would want to arrest people who are discussing carrying out a terrorist attack. I'm mean, they are just talking, that could be covered under freedom of speech. but it is meant to incite and carry out violence against others, and thus should be banned.

Offensive and hurtful are subjective terms. Therefore, anything can really be deemed hurtful or offensive. It would violate the first amendment if that kind of speech was not protected by the first amendment.